Archive for December 10th, 2008

December 10, 2008

Beware of the doghouse

BewareOfTheDoghouse.com

December 10, 2008

BlagoGate, Day 2

UPDATED & BUMPED: Under the bus:

President-elect Barack Obama is calling for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to resign. Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs says the president-elect agrees with other prominent politicians that “under the current circumstances, it is difficult for the governor to effectively do his job and serve the people of Illinois.”

(Via Hot Air.) And, also via Hot Air, “Senate Candidate 5” was Jesse Jackson Jr. I’m shocked, shocked!

MORE: Controverting claims that Obama did not discuss with the governor who would fill his Senate seat, in fact he met with Blagojevich Nov. 5 in Chicago. (H/T: Instapundit.)

UPDATE 4 P.M.: I’d rather be rubbing my hands in glee than hiding my head in shame. (H/T: Malkin.)

UPDATE 5 P.M.: Senate Democrats ask Blago to resign.

PREVIOUSLY: Day One here and here, in case you’re joining this melodrama in progress. OK, so Illinois Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich is under indictment for trying to sell the Senate seat being vacated by the president elect, and the question now is: What did Obama know, and when did he know it?

Allahpundit has a good rundown: Obama denies having any contact with Blagojevich, an assertion contradicted by Obama’s campaign manager:

But on November 23, 2008, his senior adviser David Axelrod appeared on Fox News Chicago and said something quite different.
While insisting that the President-elect had not expressed a favorite to replace him, and his inclination was to avoid being a “kingmaker,” Axelrod said, “I know he’s talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them.”

So, which is it? Did Obama talk to Blagojevich about his replacement, or didn’t he?

UPDATE I: RiShawn Biddle has a profile of Blagojevich:

After marrying the daughter of a longtime Chicago alderman, Richard Mell, Blagojevich parlayed his father-in-law’s political ties and a squeaky-clean image as a populist reformer into stints in the Illinois House of Representatives and the congressional seat once held by the infamously corrupt Dan Rostenkowski, before placing the governorship into Democratic control for the first time in three decades.

So much for that “squeaky-clean image”! Philip Klein:

Blagojevich’s declaration, recorded by wiretap, that a Senate seat “is a fu–ing valuable thing, you don’t just give it away for nothing,” is sure to enter the political scandal lexicon along with Larry Craig’s “I have a wide stance” and Marion Barry’s “the bitch set me up.”

UPDATE II: Byron York questions the timing:

And then, on December 4, something changed, and that change was the presence of the person referred to in the complaint as “Candidate Five.” If the complaint is correct, in “Candidate Five,” Blagojevich finally found a prospective senator who might come up with money – $500,000 for Blagojevich’s political organization – in return for the Obama seat.

A press leak to the Chicago Tribune Dec. 5 apparently scotched the deal, and York observes:

For anyone who has watched the case, the astonishing thing is that Blagojevich, prior to December 5, could possibly have assumed that he wasn’t under surveillance. But he apparently did, making for some of the juiciest political wiretaps in years.

UPDATE III: Michelle Malkin has a caption contest:

My suggestion: “Who is that man with Obama, and why is he wearing Michael Nesmith’s hair?”

Michelle also has a column today about Nancy “Culture of Corruption” Pelosi:

2008 was the year of Democratic Reps. William “Cold Cash” Jefferson, Charlie “Sweetheart Deals” Rangel, and former Detroit Mayor Kwame “Text Me” Kilpatrick. It was the year Democratic Massachusetts State Senator Dianne Wilkerson got caught stuffing bribes from an FBI informant down her shirt. It was the year 12 Democratic leaders and staffers in Pennsylvania’s state Capitol were stung in a massive corruption scandal involving cash, sex and abuse of public office. And it was the year of multimillion-dollar embezzlement scandals at Democratic satellite offices of ACORN and the SEIU.

Year in, year out, Democrats are more corrupt than Republicans. That’s a fact established to the point of statistical certainty in Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime, and Corruption in the Democratic Party, and in the two years since it was published, Democrats have only added more evidence to prove our point.

December 10, 2008

A most unfortunate trend

In a transparent effort to boost their ratings, ABC News reports:

Carry — a Colorado college student who had been in a steady relationship for months — was recently cajoled by her boyfriend into some sexual experimentation.
He wanted to try anal sex, and even though the 20-year-old said she was “OK with the idea,” she nervously downed several drinks before their lovemaking began.
Within 15 seconds, Carry — not her real name — said she was “crying and asking him to stop.”
They never did it again. But experts say that as social morales ease, more young heterosexuals are engaging in anal sex, a behavior once rarely mentioned in polite circles. And the experimentation, they worry, may be linked to the current increase in sexually transmitted diseases.

The menace of teen anal sex! If ABC’s not doing a random Google-bait here, I’m Joseph Pulitzer. But as for the willingness of young people to take it up the poop chute, I will point out that Obama got 66% of the under-30 vote.

December 10, 2008

Linked in "Top 40" bloggers

Linked, but not included in the actual rankings, because John Hawkins didn’t want to be accused of partiality. Hey, as Blago might say, a ranking is a f—ing valuable thing.

December 10, 2008

‘I can’t stop thinking about this picture’

So says former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers:

An incredibly talented young aide, to an impossibly idealistic new president, gets caught doing something indefensibly stupid and undeniably sexist. Everyone is uncomfortable. But should anyone be held accountable? Apparently not.
The incident I’m talking about, of course, is the photo of Jon Favreau, Barack Obama’s 27-year-old wunderkind speechwriter, with his hand on a cardboard cutout of Hillary Clinton’s chest. . . .
I can’t stop thinking about this picture, and I confess I find it really upsetting. And, no, it’s not because I don’t have a sense of humor.

The fact that Myers feels the need to insist that she’s not humorless should clue you into the fact that what follows is . . . well, humorless:

What’s bugging me is his intention. He isn’t putting his hand on her “chest,” as most of the articles and conversations about the picture have euphemistically referred to it. Rather, his hand — cupped just so — is clearly intended to signal that he’s groping her breast. And why? Surely, not to signal he finds her attractive. Au contraire. It’s an act of deliberate humiliation. Of disempowerment. Of denigration.
And it disgusts me.

Oh, puh-leeze. Look, to start with, no one named “Dee Dee” is allowed to take themselves so seriously. Second, groping a cardboard cutout’s boob doesn’t “signal” anything, except maybe that the person doing it is drunk. Third, I greatly admire Andrew Breitbart and enjoyed his Monday column about this, but he was trying to make a point about double standards: What would have happened if the offending staffer were a Republican?

The question was asked as a hypothetical, to make a point. I’m not sure that Breitbart was advocating that Jon Favreau actually suffer that fate. And certainly, I don’t.

I cannot be accused of sympathy toward Obama, but I’m tired of seeing careers in Washington destroyed by one ginned-up “incident.” Fifty or sixty years from now, when Favreau dies, his Washington Post obituary will include a paragraph about the cardboard-cutout groping incident, and I’m sure he can live with that. But to try to get him fired over that? No. And not just no, but hell, no.

As a conservative, I am grateful to Jonathan Favreau for (unintentionally) exposing the partisan double standards of media outrage about “sexism” — the scare-quotes signifying that I don’t think Favreau is any more “sexist” than anyone else. And if someone out there has a Facebook photo of a Hillary Clinton staffer acting disrespectfully toward a cardboard cutout of Obama, please publish it, so that we can discuss “racism” in the same context.

This all goes back, as Breitbart said in his column, to when “righteous feminists . . . tried to destroy Clarence Thomas – for nothing.” The worst that was alleged against Thomas was that he had made a couple of off-color jokes at the office, which somehow became transmogrified by feminist witch-hunters into sexual harassment of the “hostile environment” variety. It was insane and unjust and I hope that Jonathan Favreau, at least, can now understand why it was insane and unjust.

As for you, Ms. Myers: Spare us your phony belated outrage. You were a joke as White House press secretary, and the only reason anyone pretends to take you seriously now is because your husband is an editor at Vanity Fair.

UPDATE: Linked at Hot Air. Thanks! Over at Q&O, McQ coughs up a lung laughing at the irony of a former staffer for Bill Clinton being offended by sexual harassment. I’m sure Kathleen Willey is laughing, too.

UPDATE II: James Joyner:

If Obama wants to fire this guy for being a dumbass and embarrassing himself and his boss, that’s fine by me. If he doesn’t, though, it’s not a signal that he’s indifferent to sexism but rather that he doesn’t think groping a cardboard cutout is a hanging offense.

Unless the cardboard cutout files a lawsuit, or unless Favreau is caught on an FBI wiretap declaring that a Senate seat is a “f—ing valuable thing,” I’m pretty sure Favreau will keep his job, on the “No Drama Obama” principle. On the other hand, it’s nice to note how the Obama administration is already delivering juicy scandals more than a month before he’s even inaugurated. As I told a friend last night at my son Jefferson’s birthday party: “This is gonna be a good four years for me.”

December 10, 2008

The Christina Hendricks Gay Test

VodkaPundit wrote something very disturbing:

Christina Hendricks so isn’t my type. But lord, I am still a mammal.

“Very disturbing,” I say, because if Christina Hendricks isn’t your type, Steve, you’re gay.

As a matter of fact, I suggest that Christina could function as pretty much a litmus test of heterosexuality. If you’re a guy and you don’t find her attractive, you might as well move to Provincetown. Note, however, that the Christina Hendricks Gay Test doesn’t work for women — if you’re a woman who is otherwise straight but yet find yourself powerfully attracted to Christina, this doesn’t make you a lesbian. It just proves how hot Christina is.

She puts the “bomb” in “bombshell,” doesn’t she? BTW, I was just checking SiteMeter and noticed that someone had reached this page by searching for “Christina Hendricks nude.” Sorry to disappoint you, but there are apparently no such pictures available on the Internet. Trust me, I’m a professional journalist, and this is the kind of investigative journalism I’m good at.

Linked by VodkaPundit, who isn’t really gay. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

UPDATE: [Deleted, by request.]

UPDATE II: Melissa Clouthier links. She’s a pretty good test, too.

December 10, 2008

‘Tainted’

Statement from Sen. Harry Reid:

“It is clear that anyone Governor Blagojevich appoints to the Senate will fairly or unfairly be tainted by questions of impropriety. A different process to select a new Senator must be put in place – and that process should not involve Governor Blagojevich.”

And who can disagree? I mean, if anybody’s an expert on being “tainted by questions of impropriety” . . .